This seems so wrong headed "Proposals should not focus on making the existing Internet better through incremental changes, but rather should focus on designing comprehensive architectures that can meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century."
Right, because radical changes are so often effective and quickly adopted... go, go, government waste.
As this story grows, I can see e-bay piling up with Kindles.
I think you greatly overestimate the overlap between 1984 fans and Kindle users. Most (if not all) people unaffected will ignore this in a "...and then they came for me" type of ignorance.
You can't be serious, this was not a good show. Granted I only watched a couple of the early episodes so I will consider the possibility it improved over time. From what I saw though, it was poorly acted (Summer Glau's character had all the depth of that girl from Small Wonder), had a terrible plot concept, and the writing made it come across like a sci-fi version of Gilmore Girls.
Wow this is some really deep and thoughtful stuff here.
Personally, I haven't seen anything Trek lately that I would call a "Sci-Fi gem". I say let Abrams have his shot, its not like Franks was doing anything revolutionary with it, and lets not even start on Braga Let's hope Abrams can breath some life into what appears to have been allowed to become a dead franchise.
I dunno, I have never really understood the problem people have with EULAs. My understanding is that they primarily serve the purpose of protecting software companies from frivolous lawsuits.
I seriously doubt any company could put a clause that requires something from the user that would ever stand up in a court of law. Besides, you generally agree to them anonymously, so it isn't like they could actually track you down to ask for that firstborn you promised them.
Other than some pretty weird copyright statements like the latest Facebook TOS I've never really seen anything that made me look twice in an EULA (and no, truthfully I don't generally read them).
Again, even with the "we own your stuff" type agreements, I think it is just another attempt to completely cover their own asses and prevent users from trying to sue them for publishing stuff they posted publicly out of their own free will. Yes it is going too far, but you can't blame them for trying... well I guess you can blame them for whatever you want really;-).
No, the CRTC defines the Canadian content broadcasting rules. Obviously the network asked SCTV to help them meet their requirements, however the rules come directly from the CRTC.
The rules are beyond stupid and I can't believe they are trying to take this as far as the internet. What a waste of taxpayers dollars.
You're right, clearly they should have asked the scientists who have recently published a paper on gynecology for expert opinions on climate change.
Hmmm, a poll of all meteorological scientists huh? You mean including the ditsy weather girl on channel 6? Thanks, I will stick to the published experts.
You're argue there is no consensus, yet you just complain you don't like the evidence someone has given to you of a consensus, you provide no counter evidence just an empty anecdote.
You're opinion becomes valid when you prove to me how you are an expert on anything I should care about, least of all the global climate.
That was basically my point, about the summary. I didn't have high hopes for the article either.
Also, not to sound like a fanboy, but unless I am mistaken most linux filesystems don't suffer from serious fragmentation problems like FAT32 and NTFS.
link
I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong about that though.
Modern Sikhs typically carry just a dagger now and what they carry is a symbolic religious item. They are about as sharp as a butter knife.
Also I am sure they still have to put them in their checked luggage on planes, but even if they don't these things are not weapons and have no cutting edge. Even box-cutters are more effective.
This article really assumes that the expense of managing Citrix server farms will be significantly less than the expense of managing the XP machines.
Not that I am saying it wont be but as someone with a decent amount of experience managing servers and even with Citrix servers I'm not sure you can just say that.
This statement is retarded: "have identified a massive miscalculation that makes the LHC safety assurances more or less invalid". The only thing invalid here is that statement.
Nothing in the article suggests that they have made a 'massive miscalculation. The study appears specifically focused on the chance that any critical research findings or theory could be wrong, it doesn't actually show any work that has a miscalculation in it.
This is one of the worst summaries I have read on Slashdot to date (que: "You must not have been here very long" response;P)
Slashdot Mirror
Right, because radical changes are so often effective and quickly adopted... go, go, government waste.
mmmm... nice skinhead tats.
As this story grows, I can see e-bay piling up with Kindles.
I think you greatly overestimate the overlap between 1984 fans and Kindle users. Most (if not all) people unaffected will ignore this in a "...and then they came for me" type of ignorance.
Thanks, but I throw my garbage out.
You can't be serious, this was not a good show. Granted I only watched a couple of the early episodes so I will consider the possibility it improved over time. From what I saw though, it was poorly acted (Summer Glau's character had all the depth of that girl from Small Wonder), had a terrible plot concept, and the writing made it come across like a sci-fi version of Gilmore Girls.
Abrams sucks. This Trek will suck.
Wow this is some really deep and thoughtful stuff here.
Personally, I haven't seen anything Trek lately that I would call a "Sci-Fi gem". I say let Abrams have his shot, its not like Franks was doing anything revolutionary with it, and lets not even start on Braga Let's hope Abrams can breath some life into what appears to have been allowed to become a dead franchise.
Advocacy groups for victims of domestic violence are concerned What about ?
Yeah I don't get that either? If you are a victim of domestic violence shouldn't you just not call your abuser in the first place?
However your point that EULA's don't really offer much legal protection or legal weight is still probably valid (IANAL of course).
I seriously doubt any company could put a clause that requires something from the user that would ever stand up in a court of law. Besides, you generally agree to them anonymously, so it isn't like they could actually track you down to ask for that firstborn you promised them.
Other than some pretty weird copyright statements like the latest Facebook TOS I've never really seen anything that made me look twice in an EULA (and no, truthfully I don't generally read them).
Again, even with the "we own your stuff" type agreements, I think it is just another attempt to completely cover their own asses and prevent users from trying to sue them for publishing stuff they posted publicly out of their own free will. Yes it is going too far, but you can't blame them for trying... well I guess you can blame them for whatever you want really ;-).
No, the CRTC defines the Canadian content broadcasting rules. Obviously the network asked SCTV to help them meet their requirements, however the rules come directly from the CRTC. The rules are beyond stupid and I can't believe they are trying to take this as far as the internet. What a waste of taxpayers dollars.
Nice, now I can touch the stove again!
Hmmm, a poll of all meteorological scientists huh? You mean including the ditsy weather girl on channel 6? Thanks, I will stick to the published experts.
You're argue there is no consensus, yet you just complain you don't like the evidence someone has given to you of a consensus, you provide no counter evidence just an empty anecdote.
You're opinion becomes valid when you prove to me how you are an expert on anything I should care about, least of all the global climate.
That was basically my point, about the summary. I didn't have high hopes for the article either.
Also, not to sound like a fanboy, but unless I am mistaken most linux filesystems don't suffer from serious fragmentation problems like FAT32 and NTFS. link
I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong about that though.
I think you know perfectly well we are all wasting our work time on /.
What's wrong? I mean the summary leads you directly to the conclusion you need to be coming to here:
"The average GNU/Linux user is now getting better absolute performance from their computer as well as better value than the average Windows user."
Seriously, that's good enough for me. Don't even need to read the article now...
Modern Sikhs typically carry just a dagger now and what they carry is a symbolic religious item. They are about as sharp as a butter knife.
Also I am sure they still have to put them in their checked luggage on planes, but even if they don't these things are not weapons and have no cutting edge. Even box-cutters are more effective.
This article really assumes that the expense of managing Citrix server farms will be significantly less than the expense of managing the XP machines.
Not that I am saying it wont be but as someone with a decent amount of experience managing servers and even with Citrix servers I'm not sure you can just say that.
Even if it's true, old habits are hard to break.
This statement is retarded: "have identified a massive miscalculation that makes the LHC safety assurances more or less invalid". The only thing invalid here is that statement.
Nothing in the article suggests that they have made a 'massive miscalculation. The study appears specifically focused on the chance that any critical research findings or theory could be wrong, it doesn't actually show any work that has a miscalculation in it.
This is one of the worst summaries I have read on Slashdot to date (que: "You must not have been here very long" response ;P)